Why science and religious fatih need not be in conflict: It's as easy as 1-2-3!

[Aroura]

All you've done is double-down on your original assertion and attempted to shift the burden of proof.  What you haven't done is give a reason why moral opinions are evidence of moral facts.  

Exactly right. I want you to come out clearly and say that the evil of the Holocaust is not a moral fact. If someone has to explain to you why it was wrong then you wouldn't understand anyway.

---

The evil of the Holocaust is not a moral fact.  It is a moral opinion held by myself, and most people. 
There are plenty of people who hold a different opinion of the Holocaust.  
Do you deny that the people with a difference of opinion on this topic exist?

(p.s.  Just because you cannot fathom why a person holds a certain moral opinion does not make your position fact.  I cannot understand how anyone views the holocaust as anything but a monstrosity, yet they do.)

---

Oh, and I have a perfect "for instance". For instance, I would call a creator drowning all but a handful of his sentient creations (genocide) pretty clearly Evil.
I'm willing to bet you will dispute that God's act, in this instance, is evil, even though it seems pretty obvious to me! That's because it's an opinion, not a fact.

I would also call the Levites killing 3000 people, and keeping the virgins alive for sexual indenture is also a pretty fucking heinous moral crime. And yet I'm willing to bet you would defend this also.

And countless other similar examples. What seems morally reprehensible to one person is defended by another person, who does not have to be morally reprehensible themselves to defend it.